“In general, people are not drawn to perfection in others. People are drawn to shared interests, shared problems, and an individual’s life energy. Humans connect with humans.

Hiding one’s humanity and trying to project an image of perfection makes a person vague, slippery, lifeless, and uninteresting.”

—

Robert Glover

==================

“Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

—–

Saul D. Alinsky

===================

So.

I was fishing around for some new ways to talk about leading a business <I get bored with using the same words and thoughts over and over again> and I came across the Saul Alinsky quote … the second one I used upfront.

It resonated with me because I cannot tell you how many times I have sat in some company “forward thinking strategy” meeting discussing how we would expand the business … stretching not only beyond the existing functional strength of the business but also stepping beyond the existing expertise of the employees.

This is usually cloaked in the infamous “oh, if we can do this, we can certainly do this” statement … or the even more dangerous “we have always figured it out” mantra.

To be clear … progress is always tricky. And leading progress almost even trickier.

But, if you want it to be less trickier, ‘feeling secure’ is almost always a great step toward increasing the odds of success.

Now.

You can secure the … well … security … in a number of ways – some reality based and some emotionally charged ways.

And that is where Saul Alinsky comes back into the leadership discussion. He wrote a book calledRules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals in 1971. He wrote it as a guide to community organization <uniting “Have-Nots”, in order for them to gain social, political, legal, and economic power>.

What I loved about the Rules, beyond the rules themselves, was that Alinsky believed, when organized and directed well, the community can determine & achieve its purpose & goal. That thought, to me, is exactly the attitude a leader attempts to create <supporting a vision offered by the leader> within an organization.

What I loved about the Rules is the rules themselves are actually signposts for how to have a company compete in the marketplace.

That said.

Let me share the rules and some brief thoughts with the rules. The Rules:

—

“Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood.

Far too often … despite the fact 99% of businesses unequivocally state “our difference is our people” … a business forgets to actually build their power off of flesh & blood.

Money comes and goes.

Machines and infrastructure does what it does.

But people, flesh & blood, is the true power. It pays, as a leader, to never forget that.

“Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.

Every business I have been involved with has had an expertise. Uhm. The difficulty is that far too many leaders & managers wish the organization had a different expertise or they aspire to some other expertise.

I, personally, love the thought of isolating a company expertise, consolidating the inside expertise and using it like a battering ram in terms of progress.

People love doing things well and being appreciated for the expertise they have <and not diminished by suggesting they should have another expertise>.

“Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty.

When I saw this one I almost chuckled. It is so good, so solidly strategically right … and I would guess 95% of businesses never think this way. Oh. They may be happy identifying a “this is what we are better at than they are” and competing with that in their hip pocket … but I struggle to think of any business I have ever been involved with who has sat down and said “let’s go outside their expertise <and consciously accepting they have an expertise.”

Crushing a competitor is always fun but ignoring an opportunity to outflank them is stupid.

“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

Ok.

Here is why I loved this one.

I loved it because bullshit & hollow rhetoric and promises/claims are strewn throughout the business world. I can guarantee, with 95% certainty, I could pick up any business’s vision & strategy & ‘rules of the road’ binder and find a significant amount of hollow shit. What would happen if I consciously attacked one of my competitor’s hollow shit? Make them live up to their own book of rules?

I am chuckling.

You would crush them.

You would crush them in two ways:

External perceptions: everyone knows almost all businesses make hollow promises but get aggravated when it becomes too obvious that the promise really is hollow

Internal perceptions: almost every employee simply accepts that some of the company rhetoric is bullshit but they accept it because it doesn’t really affect them. But if the hollow rhetoric becomes obvious AND a pain in the ass … discontent grows. Bitching at the water cooler increases.

This is an awesome leadership thought.

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

I admit. Ridiculing your competition is fraught with peril. However … having some swagger and vocalizing your swagger is … well … infuriating to some competition. It puts pressure on them.

Ridiculing, specifically, what a competitor believes is their most potent weapon will … well … infuriate them.

Pick your path wisely … but there is absolutely nothing wrong with swagger, infuriating your competition and putting some pressure on them.

“A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

Far too often some strategic guru envisions some tactic that will be smashingly successful and then attempt to imbue some excitement within the people who will actually do it. I think the best strategic thinkers find tactics that people enjoy AND can be smashingly successful. Unfortunately this is harder than you would think. But nothing really good is easy.

“A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news.

Amen.

A lesson we forget every day <and should not>.

“Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.

Tactical adaptation is possibly one of the most underrated strategic decisions a business can make. While we talk a good game on this in today’s ‘digital world’ the truth is that most of us chase numbers more than we think about outflanking and expertise advantages. That is kind of the bane of the ‘big data’ world.

Numbers are good in judging things but, in the end, people & behavior are not numbers and no matter how good a tactic may appear in a number it can always be replaced.

“The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.

I am not an empty threat guy, however, ‘power is what the competition thinks you have.’ My point here is not to make shit up and offer empty threats but rather the more you can make a competitor think, and worry, about the wrongs things the better off you are.

Stoke their imagination.

Make them have high falutin’ meetings pondering “what if” scenarios.

I wouldn’t do this to replace any of the other rules … but in combination?

Whew. This is good stuff.

“The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.” It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.

Sometimes in today’s business world we treat tactics like spaghetti we throw against the wall and hope something sticks. I am not suggesting a business should invest gobs of energy developing operations to maintain constant pressure in INDIVIDUAL tactics but I am suggesting that strategic tactics tend to coalesce and operations can be developed to support them.

I imagine the real point here is hollow tactics may generate some numbers for you but they don’t really make any dent into the competition <which, inevitably, is the key to leading an industry>.

“If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog.

I love this thought because, let’s be honest, we have become a mamby pamby business world. What I mean by that is at the first glimpse of any significant negativity we tend to retreat or retrench. Pushing through a negative is not standard operating procedure in a business today.

Let me be clear on this one.

If you do Rule #5 well, you will infuriate your competition. An infuriated competitor reacts <usually with some desire to inflict some negative pain> — they will violently react. If you stay the course, maintain your expertise, well … you can push through and own a positive.

More businesses need to remember this.

“The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.

I call this “consolidating a win.”

I cannot tell you how many times <but far too many> I have seen a business “lose after winning.” It is maddening, depressing & demoralizing … and completely avoidable.

Far too many businesses chase the success assuming they will be able to take a breath and take advantage of the success in a relatively timely fashion.

This is where ideas die.

In the take-a-breath moment.

This happens for a bunch of well-intended reasons … the most likely one is everyone invests their energy on the attack and a successful attack rather than diverting any energy & time to “what do we do when we are successful” other than maybe a framework of ‘what will happen.’

Unfortunately … frameworks do not consolidate.

The solution to this is so obvious I scratch my head as to why more businesses do not do it. Businesses always have two basic levels … the outside structure and the inside structure. The outside is the face of the organization and most typically is the one that pushes through and creates the ‘wins.’ The inside operations gets shit done … I have always had an ‘inside operations team’ well briefed and ready to go and insert them into the breach as soon as the win has occurred and have the ‘fresh team’ consolidate.

I could write an entire ‘consolidation strategy’ piece but suffice it to say your business gains value in a number of dimensions by doing it this way.

The larger point with this Rule is ‘don’t lose a win by not having a plan for when you win.’

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

Well. Let me share the thought that first hit me on this … “a brand is a promise delivered in the store everyday” <this was The Limited’s phrase>. The point is that a business doesn’t exist if it doesn’t deliver upon what it promises.

That said … this is an important rule. As in a REALLY important rule that I bet 99% of companies do not even think about let alone adhere to. Most businesses target another competitor’s users & customers and go about trying to steal them <persuade them to switch>.

Well.

What about instead we attacked the company, the support network … the “promise” as it were … and make the people who actually deliver the promise start doubting, or start feeling less than secure, or just “less good about their brand & promise”?

If we did this, we create a gap, isolate as it were, between what the customer thought they wanted and what they perceive they are getting or would get.

I love this rule.

I admit I had never thought about t this way before … but from here on out it is part of my leadership toolkit.

———

Okay.

Those are some good rules for business.

But you know what?

It all comes back to the first Rule and my first quote.

Flesh & blood is the real power in any business and … people are drawn to shared interests, shared problems, and an individual’s life energy. Humans connect with humans.

Honestly … I don’t think most leaders ignore the fact the people in their organizations are important but I think we don’t elevate them to ‘flesh & blood is the power’ status.

And that is where the Rules come in.

Inherent to each rule, and the success therein, resides with … well … the flesh & blood. That is a pragmatic reminder for leading a business.

As in war, chess requires one should preserve what one can, and sacrifice what one cannot.

Even to the sacrifice of the most valuable pieces to win the game.”

—-

Rachel Caine

=====================

“I’m sick of people telling me it’s just a “get over it” situation. Fuck you. You don’t know what it’s like in my head. “

—

The Newsroom

========================

“When all the world’s a lock, you don’t find a key, you become the key.”

—-

Rachel Caine

===========================

Ok.

This is about sacrifices and how we manage, or mismanage, the sacrifices we make.

Simplistically … I tend to believe we all know that if you have to give something meaningful up … you should make it count.

Now.

We make sacrifices all the time.

Shit.

Sometimes we don’t even want to make a sacrifice … but Life steps in and actually demands we make one <and we have to deal with it>.

Regardless.

The problem is that I would bet <and I am not a betting man> that we squander 90% of our sacrifices. And I suggest that 90% number knowing that this number just doesn’t include the small sacrifices … but also some of the larger “life-defining” sacrifices.

Yeah … the larger ones. The larger ones include the kind of sacrifice that can be a defining moment — kind of a crossroads in a way. Now. I purposefully used ‘defining’ because … well … let’s face it … many of us every day schmucks can often lack a certain sureness of our own identity and a sacrifice has a nasty habit of making us face that fact and think about doing something about it.

All of what I just suggested means most of the time we want to make the sacrifice count.

Now.

The next problem is with our sacrifice mismanagement.

Almost every one of us has made some personal life changing decision <which included a sacrifice> … and went in ‘whole hog’ … and failed.

Therefore, we take our sacrifice and then sometimes seek some clarity of self or sometimes seek some collective-type identity by joining some movement or group. We convert our personal sacrifice into some collective ‘spirit of shared visions & goals’ as a means to not only seek some positive affirmation to our sacrifice but also to … well … hedge our bets.

Huh?

We know we failed in personal pursuit but believe, if in a group, it will be harder to squander the sacrifice … to not let the sacrifice not count.

Look.

I am not going to comment, or criticize, how anyone pursues insuring their sacrifice counts because what matters is insuring that any sacrifice you make doesn’t get wasted.

What I will suggest is that we let far too many sacrifices lay wasted in our rear view mirrors. I would argue that a sacrifice is like starting the engine and putting everything into gear … but you gotta supply the gas and keep your foot on the gas pedal and your hands on the steering wheel.

If you doubt that we waste them … start by just thinking about all the ‘right things’ we associate with sacrifices.

Shit.

We even have sayings to express our desire to make it count once … well … deciding it SHOULD count:

… in for a penny, in for a pound.

… go big or go home.

… all or nothing.

We say all this shit all the time which means, in our heads, that the implication is to ‘go for it’ despite the potential time investment, potential energy & effort investment and potential costs investment.

Yes … great intentions.

But … we waste it.

Simplistically most of us will run a 100 yard dash in a 5 mile race.

And then we look at the 100 yards and say “whew, I gave it my all … I went big … I was all in.” And for a 100 yards you were. The problem is that the finish line, assuming there is a finish line at all, is … well … there is another … uhm … 8700 yards to go.

Yeah.

Another 87 100 yard dashes.

That’s why making sacrifices count is so hard.

Almost everyone will go for it for 100 yards having given a meaningful sacrifice.

And will feel like you gave it a good college try.

A smaller percentage maybe will do the 2000 yards in the race … just suck it up and go for 20 100 yard dashes.

And feel like you gave it a good college try.

And a much smaller, much smaller, percentage of people will do the full 88 100 yard dashes and finish the 5 miles and make the sacrifice really count.

Well.

I will say that sacrifices really do come down to you. As in the quote I used upfront … if you make a sacrifice you don’t look for a key … you become the key that unlocks “making it count.”

Lastly.

All that said about investing the energy … we actually fuck up the whole concept of sacrifice. We fuck it up by suggesting making it count relies solely on energy & focus. But many true sacrifices demand … well … real sacrifices. What I mean by that is there are situations where you have to decide that if you want to do something or get somewhere you have to be willing to make whatever sacrifice will get you there – any sacrifice.

This makes me remind everyone what I noted upfront … chess is a great metaphor.

Many times you sacrifice a rook, a knight … maybe even the queen, the most valuable piece, to win the game.

Uhm.

That is ‘going for it.’

That is ‘go big or go home.’

It’s not just running the entire 88 100 yard dashes but also sacrificing something else <sometimes, not always> to get to where it all really counts.

And maybe that is my point.

We sometimes are fairly flippant with regard to ‘sacrifice.’

And other times, when big sacrifices are forced upon us, we are not flippant with regard to our intentions to make it count .. but because we did not choose the sacrifice, it was thrust upon us, the internal engine isn’t focused on making it count as hard as if we had actually chosen to make the sacrifice.

This all means 90% of the time we do not really make sacrifices count.

“Her sentences were icebergs, with just the tip of her thought coming out of her mouth, and the rest kept up in her head.”

–

Gregory Galloway

====================

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.”

—–

Ralph Waldo Emerson

===============

Ok.

I can honestly say that I have few friends who I know the full thinking, everything they truly think, about a thought.

Very few.

This includes even my best friends.

Uhm.

I don’t think this is unusual.

More often we only see the tip of the iceberg.

Some words to open a thought.

A sentence or two which offer a preface to a bigger story.

The rest is kept up in their heads.

The ones we know the best may give us some cues, assuming we are paying attention enough, as to where to go next.

The ones we know the least may give us only the tip of the iceberg thinking we may not deserve the rest or maybe the rest is none of our business.

Not to mix metaphors <but I will> people are truly like books we peruse at a bookstore. We scan the covers, maybe read the back and sometimes even open it up and read the inside sleeve to get a sense of what is inside. 90% of the time that is what we end up knowing about the book.

<kind of the same as an iceberg … just inside instead>

Now.

In business this is a little different.

In business … assuming you ever want to get some decisions and get something done … far more often you are exposed to a full iceberg, with regard to a thought, because business demands it. About the only way you can ever get an idea from insight to real action is to figure out a way to lift the bottom of the iceberg up & out from the ocean of ignorance and into the conference room light. And even then the business world does everything it can to encourage you to only show “what is important” … as in … “just show me the tops of the icebergs … that is all I have time for” <the assumption being (1) that is all that really matters & (2) if you are good enough you will show the tip of the iceberg well enough we will get a sense of what is under the water>.

That last thought is kind of bullshit & why this iceberg metaphor is so appropriate. The majority of any idea and thought is found below water not above and 99% of the time what is above water gives very little indication of what is truly below the water.

Compounding this issue is … well … more often than not if you bring an iceberg into a meeting you will have to discuss the fact there are a bunch of other icebergs, also with tips people can see and bottoms one can only imagine, floating around the iceberg you are discussing.

The shallowest of people in the room will scan the tips floating around and assess that way. The more thoughtful want to know at least something about the parts they cannot obviously see. And the most thoughtful are interested in everything they cannot see … even if it takes a lot of time and it is less than simple.

All that said.

I could argue that in Life or in business what is important is the part most often not seen or heard.

I could argue that in Life or in business what we actually do is spend a shitload of time focused solely on the tips of icebergs.

I could argue that the latter point is the foolish consistency of the hobgoblin of foolish little minds.

To be clear … you cannot chase all icebergs. Attitudinally you would benefit by always being curious with regard to what you can’t see but behaviorally there is just not enough time to chase down everything beneath the surface if you ever want to get anything done. in other words … chasing icebergs is not easy.

Look.

I could conclude my thought today pounding away on the importance of using curiosity to avoid bad business decisions but I will not.

Instead I will use a personal thought to make a business point.

If you think about the moments you took a moment and stopped after hearing a sentence from a friend, the tip of an iceberg as it were, and followed up with some curiosity with regard the rest of the thought that you assume was kept in the mind … and how much you were rewarded in terms of enlightenment by doing so … well … I kind of think that makes my point. It is typically a rewarding effort in terms of your friendship and connection.

We can spend our lives skating along the icy surface of irrelevance focused on the tips of icebergs or we can decide to dive down and see the larger portions of thoughts, ideas and minds hidden from sight.

“If people were employed at creating heaven on earth, everybody would be happy; instead each one is creating his own heaven by creating hell for others.”

―

Bangambiki Habyarimana

==================

“Self-interest makes some people blind, and others sharp-sighted.”

—

Francois de La Rochefoucauld

===============

Well.

As a business guy I most often view Life, government and politics, as well as business issues, thru a business lens.

It is fairly rare that I view business through a government prism.

And, yet, as I sat down to discuss self-interest and managing self-interest as a leader I found that using a governing prism was the most appropriate.

Self-interest sounds like it could be defined fairly simply because … well … it revolves around ‘self.’

Ah.

But ‘self’ depends on who is looking in the mirror as well as whatever ‘grouping of selfs’ you would like to gather up and discuss — in other words … self interest can vary depending on where you are standing.

That said … let’s discuss self-interest from a governing perceptive. Basically, self-interest can be captured in three concentric circles:

Self.

Country.

Global.

The business version could be self, group, company … or self, company, country … or … well … you get it.

Hmmmmmmm … ‘you get it.’ I do wonder if someone hasn’t worked in a larger company or even if they have but haven’t attained some management role if they ever ‘get it’ <completely at least>. Even being in management one can decide to keep their head down, under the guise of being focused n my responsibility, and just assume someone above in management is worrying about the larger picture and larger “interests” which will either benefit me or will not benefit me.

I learned this lesson early on in my management career – once I started managing a group. When I assumed the responsibility I assumed everyone would at some point do what I had done … changed companies and got new jobs. To be clear … I didn’t assume that everyone would actually do it I just assumed they would want to do it at some point. Therefore I viewed managing people and talking with people and leading the people through the full range of concentric interest circles. Simplistically, in my head, I said “I will train you and develop you so that you will be successful wherever you go from here.” my objective wasn’t just to make my group’s ‘self-interest’ a priority but rather insure that self, group, company and industry were all aligned so that the expertise and the ‘self’ could meet interests in all places at any time.

Yeah.

That created some challenges.

Yeah.

Sometimes it created some friction <because your group was always looking at other groups wondering why they did shit you didn’t do as well as it sometimes created a slightly different bar to meet than even the company itself may have demanded>.

But, yeah.

It always created the best version of each employee <and me I imagine>.

I say all that because no good leader will ever suggest it is all about one circle of self interest.

They know it is not only foolish but not true.

Meeting the need of each circle of interest is never trickle down or even trickle up … it is more often the three ‘circles of self’ in a line in which little balls are constantly weaving their way side-to-side … think maybe the eyes of the Cylons in BattleStar Galactica.

Meeting interests at all self-levels takes work. And most of us being managed or living in the everyday world are okay with that when it is explained.

But explaining it is important … and maybe HOW you explain it is even more important.

While people are mostly well-meaning <albeit in today’s world we would criticize the way Jesus put on his sandals in the morning> most of us truly do not care about the decision maker’s decision making process or even the decision maker’s fate and we certainly have no interest in putting ourselves into the decision maker’s shoes.

Yeah.

We naturally have self-interests and we weigh our own self-interests as we view the decision we will inevitably judge <prioritizing the other self interests as lower than our own but not mutually exclusive>.

You want a little of this without having to endure a little of that.

In other words … you want everything … you want to stand upon principles … you want the greater good to be served … uhm … without sacrificing anything. And, yet, we are more than willing to sacrifice some things for the greater good … economists call this “the benevolence of self-interest.”

It is too simplistic to look at people as mere ethically agnostic optimizing machines.

At the foundation of all economic theory, and behavioral theory, is the assumption that people are driven/grounded by the rational pursuit of self-interest. But, as everybody knows, people are not rational and they often act selflessly wherein things like honor, duty, love, etc. enter into the interest calculation.

When it comes to self interest, all circles that is, the evaluation does not solely reside in satisfaction of needs & wants but also in desires, purpose & welfare of others — and, yes, that includes global & country as well as individual.

I say all this because while self-interest is extraordinarily powerful it is not the end all.

And you know what?

Most of us know that in our heart of hearts.

So when a leader stands up and suggests it is all about you … and that ‘the other people’ who build initiatives and businesses which recognize the other circles of interest do not have your best interest in mind … while it sounds tasty … we know it will give us heartburn later.

Oddly enough I think of this type of false leadership as someone who is willing to put down the virtues of other people simply to bolster their own.

===============

“We’ve all started to put down the virtues of the other factions in the process of bolstering our own.

I don’t want to do that. I want to be brave, and selfless, and smart, and kind, and honest.”

–

Four <Divergent>

=============

And because I just pulled a quote from the Divergent series let me share some words in the Dauntless Manifesto:

=======

“We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another.”

—-

Dauntless Manifesto <Divergent>

===========

Well.

There is a thought for any business leader to wrap their head around. No. There is a BIG thought.

In a me, me, me world <or at least it sometimes feels that way these days> … in a world where if I see something like ‘no one will stand up for you but yourself’ … or … ‘the only one you can count on is yourself’ one more time … I will … well … begin to lose a little faith in humanity … this thought is something we should all wrap our heads around. Especially someone whose responsibility it is to view the three concentric circles of interest and … well … lead people through them all.

A good leader need not be brave but they certainly must have some courage – courage to tell the truth & courage in convictions.

Therefore circles of interest may actually come down to ordinary acts of courage.

Courage as in stepping in front of criticism.

Courage as in stepping in front of ‘doing nothing.’

Courage as in stepping in and doing what is right <even if it may not be the easiest thing to do>.

Managing the circles of self-interest as a leader is an almost impossible task.

Pull one lever and another lever is released.

But I would argue, vehemently, that the leader who embraces the circles of interest in their interconnectedness inherently understands that separation is an illusion.

====

“The greatest illusion of this world is the illusion of separation.

Things you think are separate and different are actually one and the same.

We are all one people. But we live as if divided.”

————

The Last Airbender

===

While as a leader you seek to identify with the individual as unique the underlying truth is that we are all one people who simply live as if divided. And that belief is at the core of how one manages against all three concentric interest circles as you work continuously to see that employees identify their personal success with the success of the organization and the industry itself.

Anyway.

Great businesses, and countries, are multifaceted and multidimensional. I would suggest inherent in that strength are natural divides between the facets and the dimensions … and natural connections between the facets and dimensions.

Business leaders know that. And they don’t fight it but rather simply figure out a way to get all the squirrels herded in the same direction.

From the outside people may only see squirrels running around aimlessly.

From the inside you see squirrels digging up sustenance and storing it up at the nest for the benefit of the future survival and prosperity.

And it all revolves around ‘circles of self interest.’

That is the challenge every leader faces in managing a business and a larger organization. And the multiple circles make it often extremely difficult to judge leadership <because we would prefer the simplicity of judging one circle not how they all coexist>.

As Montaigne said … “truly man is a marvelously volatile, various and wavering creature: it is difficult to base a stable and uniform judgement upon him.”

A good business leader juggles the circles of self interest and sometimes it is a little volatile and almost always wavering in some way. Yet, when well done and well-articulated, it is marvelous to see and offers marvelous benefits to all circles of interest <success in one begets success in another>.

What I can unequivocally state is that any so-called leader who focuses solely on one circle <your self-interest is most often the one> is not a leader … and should not be trusted.

I admit.

I have little, if no, patience for a leader who suggests he/she will make all decisions based on self-interest, or what is best for the ‘kitchen table in every home’, and by doing so success will “trickle up” to all other circles of interest.

I have no patience because it is not only a lie but is ignorant of how things work … well … if you want enduring success that is.

I have no patience because, in their lie, they are creating a vision of heaven for you which, in reality, is a hell for all.

‘In the day we sweat it out on the streets of a runaway American dream …’ It’s a ‘death trap,’ a ‘suicide rap.’

‘I want to guard your dreams and visions.’ ”

—

Bruce Springsteen – Born to Run

==============

“This man said that you can move to Greece, live in Greece, but you can’t become a Greek. You can move to Japan, live there, but you can’t become Japanese; or France and become a Frenchman; or German—or become a—all of these things.

But he said, everybody or anybody from any corner of the world can come to America and become an American.”

—————–

Ronald Reagan

=========

Ok.

I have a piece coming up on globalization but today it is about the American work ethos and American workers and, I imagine, a view on any version of isolationism <extreme to practical>.

I admit.

I find very little appealing in an isolationist concept <any aspect of it> … even the common rhetoric of the day.

Simplistically I feel like it suggests we, America, cannot compete globally. In my pea like brain I view it like sports … sports in which almost every home team retains an advantage … despite the same rules, same number of players, same dimensions of the court & field. Mainly it comes down to coaching, ability and , I imagine, pride of home field … uhm … but I still get on a bus and go play away games.

I believe it was Ronald Reagan who said ”American workers don’t need to hide from anyone.”

Which reminds me of how much during American presidential campaign, and even now somewhat, I found it extremely aggravating how we had a bunch of people talking about American workers and American businesses.

They all seemed to forget that our ethos is “just do it.”

When set free to do the voodoo it does … American business is dynamic, energetic, innovative, can-do and actually gets out there and makes & sells shit.

We shouldn’t be impatient because the success is coming fast enough and in our impatience “change the rules” or “hide within our borders” but instead we should use our impatience to invite competition, sweat it out and beat the crap out of them.

My impatience? I sometimes get a bit impatient when I hear people moaning about the state of the world and the inevitable “the sky is falling” or “the world is unfair” <pick your poison>.

Given an opportunity every generation believes it is tougher for them and will create their own prognostications of doom & gloom and, yet, we are still here and still have the world’s largest economy <and best on a variety of measures>.

I am not suggesting there aren’t real business issues and I am not suggesting from a regulatory standpoint there are some tweaks to the system which would enable businesses to improve themselves to compete better <please notice I didn’t say “to constrict the competition” but rather to have us improve to compete>.

Isolation goes against every bone in our “just do it” American body & soul.

Nike trademarked it but the pilgrims brought it to America. From day one immigrants, with the help of Native Americans, went to work building America … stone by stone … seed by seed … idea by idea … sweat drop by sweat drop.

America First should never be America Alone.

America has never been an individual competition it has always been about a team competition.

America First should be earned on the playing field competing against the best of the best and winning <by the way … that defines ‘exceptionalism’>.

America should be about building a better engine, building a better race car and running a better race.

===============

”It’s time to gun the engines, not put on the brakes.”

——–

Ronald Reagan

==========

It is aggravating to hear “close the borders” combined with “the world is going to shit” … which all leads to ‘disengage from the world <competition>.’

Really?

REALLY?

What kind of shit response is that?

What kind of “winner” doesn’t want to compete and compete against the best?

It seems like we should be investing not in building advantages for ourselves but rather in building a better team. That is where money and energy should be spent.

Hire better coaches.

Offer better training programs.

Buy better equipment.

Study better strategies.

Create better plan of attacks.

I wasn’t a huge Ronald Reagan fan but he got it … he hated changing the rules of the business game <tariffs & regulations> and only did so situationally, tactically and for short term ‘balancing out’ … as he says … given a respite from predatory import practices, can become competitive in a world market.

But … he understood the importance of the attitude of the American worker above all else … check out these words he said to Harley Davidson:

… you gave some folks in Washington an important lesson about how we go about buying and selling with other nations. You see, we’ve shaken hands on an agreement with most of the other nations of the world, an agreement that sets the rules for international trade. We have problems, of course, with some of those nations—the ones that don’t let us sell to their people as freely as they sell to ours. But the agreement, called the GATT agreement—that’s the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade — gives us ways of dealing with those problems, and it also gives us ways of giving industries the kind of breathing room we gave you.

And if they’re as serious as you were about shaping up—now we’re about to begin worldwide talks on how to make this agreement even stronger.

Because of the GATT agreement, when you were ready to sell more bikes around the world, no one stopped you.

But now there are some in Congress who say, in effect, that the United States should break its word with the other countries.

They say American workers need to run and hide from foreign competition, even if that means other countries will strike back by not letting you sell your bikes to their people. Well, Harley-Davidson has shown how wrong that is and what the truth is. American workers don’t need to hide from anyone. America does best when America sticks by its word. And American workers can take on the best in the world, anywhere, anytime, anyplace. No one is better than you are.

You may have heard that my temperature’s up about some trade legislation that’s before the Congress right now. On TV the other night, it was called one of the toughest trade bills of this century. I remember the last time we had a so-called tough trade bill. It was called Smoot-Hawley, and they said it would protect American jobs. Instead, after other nations were through retaliating, it helped us—or it helped give us, or at least deepened, the Great Depression of the 1930’s. I’m probably the only one here that’s old enough to remember that. I was looking for a job then. [Laughter] Twenty-five percent were unemployed, including me.

The Harley-Davidson example makes a very strong statement about how government, through the judicious application of our trade laws, can help the best and the brightest in American management and labor come together in ways that will create new jobs, new growth, and new prosperity. Government’s role, particularly on the trade front, should be one of creating the conditions where fair trade will flourish, and this is precisely what has been done here. Our trade laws should work to foster growth and trade, not shut it off. And that’s what’s at the heart of our fair trade policy: opening foreign markets, not closing ours. Where U.S. firms have suffered from temporary surges in foreign competition, we haven’t been shy about using our import laws to produce temporary relief. Now, there are those in Congress who say our trade policies haven’t worked, but you here at Harley-Davidson are living proof that our laws are working. The idea of going to mandatory retaliation and shutting down on Presidential discretion in enforcing our trade laws is moving toward a policy that invites, even encourages, trade wars. It’s time to work to expand the world market, not restrict it.

Today, as many as 10 million American jobs are tied to international trade, including many jobs right here at Harley. For more than a century, when America’s trade with the world has grown, America has created more jobs. When trade has declined, so have the number of jobs. So, when it comes to making new jobs, free and fair international trade is America’s big machine. It’s time to gun the engines, not put on the brakes. Your chairman, Vaughn Beals, summed it up when he said, and I will quote him: “We’re sending a very strong message to our competitors and to the international industrial community that U.S. workers, given a respite from predatory import practices, can become competitive in a world market.”

The best way to meet foreign competition is also the right way: by sticking to our agreements with other countries and not breaking our promises, by making sure other countries also stick to their agreements with us, and by being the best. As America prepares for the 21st century, you’ve shown us how to be the best. You’ve been leaders in new technology. You’ve stuck by the basic American values of hard work and fair play.

================

A danger we are currently meandering our way toward is one of attitude.

We currently have a president who doesn’t foster attitude and belief in self but rather believes success is found solely in removing disadvantages, real or not, and removing “unfairness” <even if the other team were simply playing the game better or had better players>.

He is wrong in his approach.

Business is often more about attitude and fortitude then it is about whether “the pitch was mowed at 1 inch instead of an inch & a ½.”

It is a false narrative, and a dangerous narrative, to suggest success is based on ‘fairness’. Why? Because … well … more often than not we will always find that the world was unfair in some form or fashion … and you know what?

You still gotta compete, you still gotta play the game and you still gotta figure out a way to win.

America is at its bestjust doing it … sweating it out on the streets seeking the runaway American dream.

America is at its best when it ignores all the reason why we cannot do something and just go do it anyway.

America is at its best when we have a leader standing up in front of us not making excuses, not whining about unfairness and all the reasons why we haven’t been successful … but one who is instead saying “here is what we are gonna do and lets go do it.”

It was Theodore Roosevelt, in 1904, who said:

“We, the people, can preserve our liberty and our greatness in time of peace only by ourselves exercising the virtues of honesty, of self-restraint, and of fair dealing between man and man.”

But he also reminded everyone of the importance of work ethic.

“They stood for the life of effort, not the life of ease.”

Freedom, Roosevelt warned, had to be earned by the exercise of restraint, and its bounty could only be harvested by diligent labor.

Anyway.

I am not an isolationist mostly because of all I have written today. I am a business guy and as a business guy I want to compete … and I believe I can compete well and win often enough if I put in the smart thinking and the diligent labor.

While I may proudly wrap myself in an American flag I also proudly wrap myself in an attitude … ”American workers don’t need to hide from anyone” … and I am an American worker.

We should never underestimate the American worker and American business ingenuity.

We shouldn’t hide from the world … we should be building the best team and sending them to the far corners of the world, wherever they may have an opportunity to compete, and win through hard work and fair play.

Isolation is the wrong path. It’s not American. We compete, work hard, play by the rules … and win more often than we lose.

American workers can take on the best in the world, anywhere, anytime, anyplace.

The story of why things are the way they are is heartbreakingly beautiful.”

———

Keegan Allen

=============

I admit.

I am one of those wacky business people who will listen for hours to stories about why things are the way they are. Even wackier? I am not one of those business people who act surprised when I hear all the “why it is what it is” stories.

Many people want to hear about the people.

Many people want to hear about the ideas … or even what someone thinks or what they want.

Many people want to let others talk about whatever they want to talk about.

All of that is well and good.

But me? Give me the story of “why.”

I am actually surprised more businesses don’t ask that question or are as curious about it. I am surprised because if you know the ‘why’ you at least have a fighting chance of offering something doable.

In fact. While many business people shake their heads over all the crazy “why shit happens” stories the truth is … well … they actually offer the truth. The ‘why’ gives us reality. Bad reality sometimes? Sure. But reality nonetheless.

Far too often we offer business folk offer solutions, and many times really good solutions, which are simply non practical for the business and people we are offering it to.

Crazy as it sounds … not every business can implement a good idea. In fact … trying to implement a good idea in a business whose “why it is” doesn’t align more often creates a nightmare idea.

A business is a business. It comes with all the warts and positives gained throughout the years.

I like to hear the objective.

I absolutely love to hear the vision <assuming someone actually has one>.

But when push comes to shove while all that stuff is fine and dandy … but if you don’t know why things are the way they are or why that objective hasn’t been attained yet or why that vision has been sitting on some shelf collecting dust for several years … you are screwed.

You are screwed because “why things are the way they are”, 99% of the time, have a reason. You may not like the reason, or reasons, but it is a reflection of reality.

It doesn’t mean you cannot change some of the whys.

It doesn’t mean you can’t jump, side step or tunnel under some of the whys.

But why shit is the way it is reflects the realities of that particular business. And you either have to face that fact or ignore at your own peril. Ignoring it most likely means whatever great idea you are offering that business is doomed.

I cannot tell you how many really good ideas I have seen die because they just

didn’t take into account the ‘why things are the way they are’ in that business. It is the amateur business consultant who suggests that ‘with the proper internal alignment initiative we can get this idea up & running to the benefit of the business’ … for any and all businesses assuming you ca reshape all the “why it is” to make it fit the idea.

I don’t think I am that smart but suffice it to say I am fairly sure most experienced business people can see good solutions for any business fairly quickly once they get up to speed on that business and its situation.

Most people can do that.

But solutions are not all round pegs and businesses are not all round holes. I cannot tell you how many really good solutions I have tossed in the trash simply because they would never be implemented by the business it would have been really good for. Suffice it to say … a lot.

I would note that the opening quote resonated with me mostly because of the last thing I just wrote.

It is heartbreaking to sit in some business meeting and you have the great solution right there at your fingertips and you know after listening to the ‘why things are the way they are’ stories you have to leave it right there on the table and shove it somewhere into some unlabeled folder.

That doesn’t mean you can’t come up with something else that helps.

But, oh, it is heartbreaking when the best solution is just not doable.

What helps me get over it?

Maddening or not … I find the ‘why things are the way they are’ stories beautiful … beautifully tragic, beautifully fortunate, beautifully doomed and beautifully hopeful. And I think it helps me better find the “beautiful solution.”

In the end … business is almost always a beautiful struggle between “why it is what it is” and “what I would like to do.”

let the stardust inside your veins shine bright and light up the lives of those around you

===

Potential is an amazing thing.

Well.

Amazingly good … and amazingly bad.

It pulls, it pushes and it ties you down all at the same time.

It certainly begets thoughts of what could be as well as thoughts of “am I enough.” And it certainly teases the human imagination to think about the endless possibilities within one’s soul & purpose.

Potential asks for great things from people.

And, once accepted by someone, potential demands some things from that person.

Suffice it to say potential becomes alternatively an individual’s burden and an engine. It forces a test of ‘self’ with regard to potential, in this case, is your engine strong enough to carry the burden?

And the engine has almost as many moving parts as a car engine does. It isn’t just belief … thinking you are capable of whatever it is you want to be capable of … it is also the hard work, the skill and the opportunistic management in Life. You have to engage all parts to make the engine run effectively.

But … and this is a HUGE but … you have to wrap your head around this wacky thing called ‘potential’ the right way … or you will not do so well.

What do I mean?

A shitload of people view ‘I am not living up to potential’ as some fucked up personal code for ‘not being recognized for how good I really am.’

In order to understand potential demands having some personal perspective.

I admit.

I want to actively vomit when I read shit like this:

I’m not living up to my maximum potential.

The biggest thing blocking my path right now is myself and I want to change for the better. I have big dreams, but it’s sad to be in the condition I’m in where the light and power is there but it’s not yet burning to the max.

I just want to say … “c’mon, get a grip <and grow up>.”

Look.

There is a difference between dreams and reality.

There is a difference between what I can do and that sometimes wacky perspective with regard to ‘what I can actually do <often called ‘potential’>.

There is a difference between pragmatism and possibilities.

Some people seem to think potential is like some magical wand they can wave to create some alternative dimension where anyone can do anything they dream or want to do.

Potential certainly exists in everyone but it isn’t something you tap into and “make it burn to the max’ it is a … well … burden. And you either choose to carry it well or permit it to weigh you down.

But we should all get it through our pea like brains that we all carry this burden <albeit in different sizes and shapes> and how well we carry that burden pretty much depends on our perspective with regard to our potential <and potential itself>.

====

“Greatness demands that I understand that I am not nearly as big as I thought myself to be, but that I am capable of becoming far bigger than I ever imagined myself to be.”

―

Craig D. Lounsbrough

=====

But “living up to our potential?”

Now that’s bullshit.

Yeah.

The idea that we somehow have a certain amount of potential that we must live up to is a bullshit. A total bullshit fortune cookie wisdom soundbite.

I tend to believe the same people who say they are not living up to their potential are the same people who pretty much have no fucking clue with regard to what living means and what is important in life.

I believe 99% of people understand Life is very hard.

We all have some fundamental desires and goals which set the basics for our horizon thinking <even if it is waking up and having eth optimism needed to aim for the horizon which on that day is simply the end of that day>.

And with that thought … well … get out of our fucking beds and go do some shit.

Some of the shit meets the fundamental needs. Some of the shit is … well … just shit. Some of the shit is good. And some shit, on some days, seems to tap into what we truly believe we are capable of. Let’s call this ‘what we believe is our greater potential.”

It is that last shit that can screw us up.

We want more of that last shit.

We see it as “our true potential” and “why shouldn’t we do that, and be that, all the time.”

It makes us happy to think we could do more of that shit. And, most importantly, it makes us believe we have better shit within us we could do if given the opportunity.

“You cannot use someone else’s fire; you can only use your own. And in order to do that, you must first be willing to believe you have it. “

–

Audre Lorde

But you know what?

Maximizing Life and your potential may quite possibly look exactly how I just wrote it out.

Waking up, doing some shit shit, doing some good shit and doing some shit which maxes out our potential.

Maybe that is Life.

And if you don’t think what I am suggesting is true?

Well.

Maybe get your head out of your ass and think about it <instead of listening to all the other assholes screaming about all the potential you are not maximizing>.

Maybe take a moment and acknowledge that potential as a concept is a fairly delusional concept. Acknowledge that most likely it is a concept not created from within but by someone or something without creating some perception.

Maybe acknowledge that potential more often than not implies you are in some fucked up race to be better than someone else. Life is not a race. In fact. It is not even a competition.

In a race ‘potential’ always seem to become relative to everyone else in the race. how fucked up is that? I mean … what the hell … its your potential. So maybe acknowledge that if you stop looking at Life as a competition you cn most likley stop worrying about whether you finish first or not.

Lastly.

Just go ahead and acknowledge that ‘living up to your potential’ is a fucked up phrase you hear in your youth from older people suggesting you are capable of being the best … or at least better than maybe what your reality suggests would be more realistic in your own head. And, if you think about it, this phrase more likely than not comes from people who have no fucking clue what you really want to do in your life and with your life <mostly because you have no fucking clue what you want to do in your life and with your life>.

You want to know how to live up to your potential?

Do the right thing <as often as you can>.

Do the best you can <as often as you can>.

Show respect to others. Show some kindness in moments where kindness may seem difficult to show. Show some dignity in the moments of loss … and success.

Live with some honor.

And if someone whispers “oh, you have so much more you could do” just look at them and shake your head. They don’t get it. By doing what you are doing you are maximizing living Life … all the rest of the crap is shit that can possibly earn you some more money and maybe even win some fancy awards but they won’t earn you the really important stuff – maxing out Life itself.

Now that is what potential seems to me.

Potential seems like … well … letting the stardust inside your veins shine bright and light up the lives of those around you.

I have always had a slightly contrarian view on relationships with competitors in the business environment.

I always met with them.

I always encouraged my people to meet, and interact, with them.

I always debated and discussed with them.

I have always had some friends at competitors … and certainly had some enemies at competitors.

Oh.

And I have always been quite willing to put them out of business if, competitively, I felt like my business was better than theirs.

Yeah.

I just said that. In fact. I said two things.

First.

Put them out of business. This doesn’t mean doing anything evil nor does it mean going behind anyone’s back in some slimy undercutting way. This is about confidently putting yourself alongside the enemy and beating the living daylights out of them. And doing so over and over again until you suffocate their business or they just quit.

Second.

Please note ‘my business was better than theirs.’

Well.

Yeah.

Sometimes you are actually not the best and sometimes you are actually not different in any real significant way.

Sometimes you are just a different alternative.

Sometimes you don’t compete exactly directly.

And sometimes your enemy actually is a better fit for someone then you are.

But.

If you are better, then beat them.

Now.

Beyond beating the crap out of some competitor … 90% of the time I find the ‘enemy’ quite the delight to rub elbows with.

This doesn’t mean I was flippant with regard to confidential information it is just that I believe ‘unique’ or ‘proprietary’ are more often than not … well … not. I also believe that my ‘enemy’ was simply a business competitor who had the same interests that I did <selling more shit at the highest price possible>.

But I have never understood some absurd ‘never talk with the competitor.” And I think it is absurd for a variety of reasons but let’s go through why business relationships are always tricky But no reason to not interact openly with a competitor>.

Your best employee may become the best employee at your competitor at some point.

Your favorite boss may leave and start a new company … competing against a portion of your offering.

You may leave, leaving behind a boatload of people you like & respect, to take a promotion at some competitor and … well … compete against those same people you like & respect who happen to be at a company you still like & respect.

And the trickiest?

Sometimes you actually decide to partner with a sometimes enemy because of mutual interest <and money of course>.

What business teaches you … well … what it should teach you is that there are no permanent allies, no permanent friends, no permanent enemies and, really, only permanent interests.

This shouldn’t be construed in any way as morally hollow or ethically challenged.

It is a simple business truth that it is in the interest of a person and business to maximize behavior in a given situation. That means you give your best, you offer your best and be your best regardless of who is in the room or whomever you may be competing with.

I imagine the net translation on that thought is that through individual behavior the interests of a business are being best served and ultimately it is the interest of the business itself that is the only thing that truly remains constant.

The corollary?

Friends and enemies may keep changing depending on what suits the business interest best.

Sure.

There are potential costs … as well as potential benefits to rubbing elbows and being friendly, or at least conversationally cordial, to your competitors.

But that should not mean ignoring competition nor should it mean not maintaining some dialogue with them.

Some people will not agree with this.

What I have on my side is diplomatic history. The concept of ‘continuous dialogue’ originated in the 17th century with the French and Cardinal Richelieu.

It is a “belief in the utility of diplomatic representation and communication even between states that have reached a hostile relationship short of war.”

And you do so not to be friends, nor to seek to be allies, but to maintain the respect of two entities with different interests, but a similar interest to succeed, as a way to reduce the chances of war.

But let me point to what I believe is the truest of benefits.

People.

As long as your business is well defined, as long as your business has a strong culture, as long as your business fosters the attitude of ‘being the best’ without arrogance … I would suggest that nothing strengthens your people than interacting with the people of friends, enemies and those with different interests. Your people, through interaction with others who may be seeking things on their own self best interest, are the surest arbiters of what is right, wrong, true, false, lawful or ethically hollow.

And while I do not think this is solely an American trait it was Alexis de Tocqueville who said this about Americans in 1831:

[T]hey hold that public opinion is the surest arbiter of what is lawful or forbidden, true or false. … They hold that every man is born in possession of the right of self-government, and that no one has the right of constraining his fellow-creatures to be happy. They have all a lively faith in the perfectibility of man; they are of opinion that the effects of the diffusion of knowledge must necessarily be advantageous, and the consequences of ignorance fatal; they all consider society as a body in a state of improvement, humanity as a changing scene, in which nothing is, or ought to be, permanent.

It is the people who are the surest arbiter of true & false … therefore if you ever want someone to truly believe in your business that you must mentally believe “the consequences of ignorance fatal.”

And embrace that an industry, which is often a society within itself, is a body in a state of improvement.

Keeping yourself, or your employees, cocooned within just who and what you are endangers the livelihood of the business itself in that you miss the opportunity for potential change and run the danger of ‘permanent’ <or stagnant>.

I personally find nothing wrong with positioning yourself as close to your competitors as you possibly can. The benefits outweigh the possible negatives.

On a separate note.

I tend to believe this idea works just as well in non-business life.

I have friends & acquaintances who clearly have different political points of view, different views on religion as well as significantly different views on a spectrum of different things. I watch news programs and listen to news programs which clearly do not appeal to my sense of what is true or right.

It doesn’t harden my point of view but it certainly makes me more self-aware with regard to how others think and why they do the things they do.

And it certainly reminds me that no matter how much I may disagree with someone the majority of the time they have the same interests that I do – a better country and a better way of doing things.

I don’t think this makes me any better than others but it may make me a little more enlightened and aware.